« Dhimmitude Imposed at Penn State | Main | Cynthia Being Cynthia »

And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the money shot from the article in question (right at the end, where the money shot should be):

"But the president will not call the oil companies into his office because he's been too closely allied with those oil companies, and if he does it's going to be a window-dressing conversation," said Levin, who appeared with Specter on CNN's "Late Edition."

You see, the Rebulicans don't love you. Levin does. He's not in bed with big oil, and besides, we all know that the president can fix fuel prices unilateraly (it's in the Constitution, right after the right to keep bear arms, although why anyone would want to hurt a bear to take its arm is beyond me). He just doesn't want to. That's all. If he would just threaten his cronies in big oil they would back down, but he won't because he wants you to be sad. Levin doesn't want you to be sad. He wants to hurt the big oil meanies and make you happy, so you can get in your car and go and go and go.

Today's Moonbat story was brought to you by the letters "B" and "S" and by the number 23, which was the average amount of taxes on a gallon of gas in 2004.

And now for something a bit more serious on the subject. Fuel prices are rising a corporate profits are rising with them. To any good Socialist or Democratic Party member, profits are a bad thing. If somebody makes a profit, they are obviously cheating somebody to do it and should be punished.

As much as I hate paying high prices at the pump, and as much as I suspect there was some serious price gouging going on in the wake of Katrina, I can't see how slamming the guys making the money is going to reduce my fuel bill. All it is going to do is give the "excess profit" to the government. I think PJ O'Rourke said it best: "Giving money to government is like giving whiskey and carkeys to a teenager." Something bad is going to happen.

Levin is a self-righteous twit at best, but more likely he is the much more odious garden variety political weasle here. He sees a triple opportunity: 1) He can blame the whole problem on the Rebulican party in general and President Bush in particular; 2) He can paint himself as the savior of the masses, because the masses are too stupid and powerless to save themselves; 3) He gets to have the oil companies collect an additional tax from the public and send it to the federal government, where he can strip down and wallow around in it before using it to porkbarrel a few more votes for the party.

If you want to get gas prices to start going down, use less gas. Supply and demand really does work. Yes, it is less fun to park the car and walk. Yes, it is less convinient to make one trip instead of three or four to run errands and shuttle the kids. Yes, it does take more effort. But the important thing here is that YOU do it. You aren't waiting for Uncle Sugar to come up with some half-assed solution or even worse even more regulations.

And in case anyone is interested, When I took my present job I picked a house to rent within walking distance of work. Whenever I can (depending on weather and what I have to carry) I ride a motorcycle instead of cranking the truck. Net result: I buy a tank of gas roughly every five weeks for the truck and twice a month for the bike unless I take a trip out of town.

This happens every time gasoline hits $3.00/gallon in most of the country. Windfall profits taxes would do nothing to lower gasoline price and in the long run would make them even higher. High prices will encourage coal, oil sands, oil shale to gasoline projects.

Open up more areas for oil and gas production for starters. Sell or lease old military bases for construction of new refineries. Environmental regulation make building new refineries almost impossible.

Al Gore proposed taxes on gasoline to keep it at $5.00/gallon - the moonbats hailed this as "progressive".

If people are ever to buy fuel efficient vehicles and switch to alternative fuels, gasoline prices have to remain high. Cheap gas encourages people to waste gas. People became to accustomed to cheap gas in the late 80s and 90s. If people cut back 5% on their driving, prices would plummet. But people always say "Let someone else cut back".

As long as gasoline remains as high as it is the populist rhetoric will continue. The same thing happened with Natural Gas this past winter, prices are now down over 50% in most areas and the talk of taxing natural gas profits has evaporated.

Now it is true that CEO compensation packages in general are obscenely high but they are taxed at the maximum rate. Most of it is in stock not cash.

I have heard of people buying houses 20 years ago for $100,000 and selling now for $1,000,000 - should there be a windfall profits tax on real estate sales? Why isnt there a call for that?

I choose to live close to work where I can use public transporation for $60/month - for most people $60 wouldnt be enough to fill up their SUV just once. I have a used car for occasions when I need to get somewhere fast. This also results in lower car insurance premiums. Other people car pool. Ride with 1 other person - cut gasoline cost to $1.50 gallon, 2 other people $1.00/gallon, 3 other people 75 cent/gallon (assuming the costs are divided evenly and no one is stiffing the driver). Of coure most people want their freedom to drive alone.